Bushmaster has recently released its civilian version of the Adaptive Combat Rifle and displayed both the Civvie model and the so-called “Enhanced” version of the ACR intended for military customers.
Bushmaster rep Ryan Smith went through the features of the gun formerly known as the Magpul Masada and explained the Bushmaster was working the state national guard and law enforcement customers, while Remington was working the military deal.
As you well know, the Army is in the middle of an internal look at whether to replace the M4 as the standard issue carbine, and the ACR would be a strong candidate for the job. The ACR is the only rifle in the running that can undergo a quick and easy caliber change. A source with Bushmaster who declined to be quoted on the record said that Remington plans to offer the ACR in both 5.56mm and 6.8mm.
The Army could buy the Improved Carbine and Personal Defense Weapon all in one package…?
– Christian
{ 79 comments… read them below or add one }
I want one
ME 2
Robinson Armament (maker of the XCR) is suing these guys for apparent patent infringement. It will be interesting to see how that pans out.
http://soldiersystems.net/2010/01/15/robinson-arm…
For $2,685 for the bare bones model, I will pass.
I agree I would rather get the socom 2 for that price
I imagine if the US Army bought half a million of these the price would go down a bit.
I'd be happy with just about anything right now, The AR-15 platform is great, its a benchmark in rifle history but so was the Garand and that got phased out, it's time for something new preferably modular and gas piston related, I don't care if it's this or the SCAR or the 416 my moneys on the ACR or the 416 but that's me, The AR-15 should be dead by now and this gun looks promising is more or less what i'm getting at.
I love the SCAR. Regardless of what the US chooses, gas piston is amazing!
The AR platform works just fine for the civilian market, law enforcement, and most of the military market. Especially in the A4 configurationn. A short -stroke gas system may be relevant in some military applications. As far as the Garand, you can take the ACR I'll take the Garand. I'll win.
When I was in the New Zealand army, we were issued with the FN FAL in 7.62. (SLR). It was gas operated with a piston. What a total bitch it was compared to the M-16 that we were also issued with. It kept jamming and you had to keep mucking around with the gas system, which also made the rifle harder to keep clean, and often cleaning rags got jammed in the gas tube. The M-16 was on the other hand loved. It was more reliable, lighter and as we used both weapons along side each other we could directly compare the difference. We even had Stirling 9mm sum-machine guns. The M-i6 was by far the better weapon. It had the compactness and fire power of the submachine gun and the range of the SLR. Not only that, it was able to out shoot the SLR at any range. There were always hits at 300 meters from the M-16, and less than 60% of that with the 7.62 SLR. Whats the point of hitting power if you can't hit your target. We used to have to do waht was called a battle shoot immediately after a 10mile run in full pack and boots under two hours. with the SLR the fail rate was extremely high compared to the M-16. It felt like a lump of front heavy lead com[ared to the M-16, and bear in mind you were feeling like vomiting and the sweat in your eyes didn't help, but the M-16 made rapid control possible and had natural pointing and balance, and the low recoil aided rapid fire, AND it didn't jam!
Wow, how old were the FN FAL's you Kiwis were issued? I was shooting a FN SCAR recently- about 2 months ago in 5.56 (right after shooting my AR15) and it performed amazingly.
I don't have extensive experience shooting gas piston systems so I can't comment. My guess is could be that it was just an older rifle or the piston system had problems with the 7.62.
hi, the ones I used were up to 10 years old. BUt they were well maintained. When the NZ army sold off thier FNs, you could buy them from gun shops from $375-$800 depending on condition. I bought 2, one for use, and one was an ex-cerimonial rifle that had rose wood furniture and was in totally mint condition.. They both jambed once every two mags on average. It was always the gas system. You had to get the setting right. Not enough gas and it would not cycle properly, too much and it really kicked like a mule. The way it went was that as the gun got dirtier, you let in more gas. Well that was the theory, but you didn't know how much was enough until it didn't work. Then you adjusted it. I left mine half way.
It felt like a REAL weapon compared to the M-16, but it gained an extra 2lb per hour after midnight, especially if it was raining. I learnt that a gun should be light, because you carry it more than you shoot it.
I hear about the FN FAL if you take out the piston to clean it or whatever and you put it back again you had to adjust the gas piston well because if you dont is gonna happen what you say its gonna jam because the piston is not gettin to the place he should.
More
Now I can tell you that after been hit twice by bullets, that even a .22 RF feels like a 20mm cannon, so don't anyone tell you that you wouldn't notice a 5.56 hit. So more hitting powerr doesn't equal a better rifle or we would have all been issued with M-82 Barrets in .50cal.
You are far better off with a pistonless weapon than one that will jam, and parts wear and bend over time. They might seem ok when new, but that will change, where a AR-15 round will keep going as long as you keep it clean. Lightness, relaibility and hits on your target are what count.
The NZ army was so impressed with the M-16, that it decided to get rid of the FN FAL and go to in 5.56mm completely. We wanted to buy the Canadian versions for $585 each, but we were forced to take the Austrian Steyer Augs at $2500 each or Austria would have blocked out dairy imports into the EU.
As for saying that the M-16 /AR-15/M-4 has been around for a long time, well so has the AK-47, but it still manages to kill American troops extremely well,and I guarantee it will keep killing you just as well in Iran and Yemen and wherever your next invasions. its not the age aof a weapon, its the effectiveness that matters
By the way, New Zealand was the first country to use the M-16 in combat, using the AR-15 in the original Remington .222 chambering n the 'Malaysian Emergency' in 1958 fighting the communist insurgents there until we defeated them
Anyway the point is, (I am sure Sun Tzu would agree), simplicity over complexity, lightness over heavyness, only actual hits on target count, if it ain't broke don't fix it.
and furthermore, if any of you arm chair armourers can do better, design your own weapon. I mean Mike 'the MAN' Kalashnikov did so from a hospital bed during a world war after having bieng shot up the Arse by a 88mm Nazi Tiger Tank.
So stop bitching and trying to criticize Mr Stoners work. Giving the same basic weapon a new paint scheme and some tinsel add-ons is not a new weapon, just a worse one.
Too bad your country isn't worth invading you POS. Go F^^K yourself pete. If it wasn't for the USA you would be fluent in deutche.
What the fvck is your problem? NZ probem was with the Japanese you dumb ass. They were some of the best jungle fighters on earth. Pete, not all Americans are like this sh#t-for-brains. Sorry. Also, your right on.
Well, aren’t you just an ignorant little hillbilly?
And historically, if it wans’t for the USA, that poor, fat, bankrupt country, WW2 might have been over much sooner.
Harry's smoking the crack pipe again…
Pete do yourself a favor and ignore GI JO. According to him i'm an ignorant religous fascist. Aparently he never got the memo that knowing was half the battle.
Hi, thanks for that. You might like to read my comment to him below.
Regards, pete
My father was shot in the thigh by a jap while operating a bulldozer at Henderson field in Guadalcanal while in the Royal NZ Engineers. He was then sent to Japan as part of the occupation forces there, supervising the destruction of surrendered Japanese aircraft.
My mother was a lawyer who during the war built GM 4×4 trucks at Wellington. My grandfather a WW1 veteran who was only one of three survivors out of the 110 original men in his company who were sent to France in 1916
When WW2 started was drafted to man the anti-aircraft defenses at Wellington harbor, and my grandmother was a teacher who was sent to Bougainville as an administration officer.
My uncle was killed in action in 1941 in North Africa. They had been fighting before America had even started to think about it
.My mother met a lot of US Marines who were stationed in NZ before the invasions of the pacific island strongholds. She was engaged to a US airman who was shot down over the Rhine in 1944. She refused to let me or my brother see the '1000 bomber plane raid' film because she couldn't stand the thought of what 'those boys went through'. I only stopped pestering her to let us when she kept crying.
So yes, I have immense respect for the American people and soldiers, because we NEVER forget what sacrifices they ALSO made.
In fact there are new memorial plaques mounted at the wharfs
And by the way, NZ lost over 90% of the airmen it sent to Europe. The English only wanted trained aircrews as they had enough support personnel. 110,000 soldiers served overseas, out of a population of 2.1 million. The US had problems fielding 134,000 men out of a population of 360,000,000
New Zealand has fought in every major conflict alongside the US, in both world wars, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf war in '91, Iraq, and now in Afghanistan.
Anyway, I was trying to give you some friendly advice about abandoning a perfectly good weapon for no good reason other than "its old", when I know what is being touted is a backward step.
Pete, I agree with what you are saying here.
"its not the age aof a weapon, its the effectiveness that matters"
Very true. However, Americans (like myself) continue to want to embrace new technology and designs as time moves on. Perhaps it's just not time to embrace a new rifle design yet.
Regardless, we Americans pride ourselves with our leading edge defense tech. Don't mind folks who get a little carried away… :)
Hi maxentropy ,
Thanks for that, I agree entirely. I have developed a caseless, recoiless taper bore, sabot hypervelocity round myself that I am offering it to the US free of any charge, so I will also put my money where my mouth is when I say that i do suport the US as 'a power of good' (Just keep rednecks like Bush out of power :) ).
I responded to 'our friend' above. You may like to read it.
Regards
Amen Pete!
Yeah, hillbilly’s service didn’t proceed past smearing shit on unarmed, innocent prisoners at Abu Graib.
That, and molesting the male prisoners.
wtf?
"This comment has been deleted by the administrator. "
I hate you…
The interesting question is with ammo – the US moved from 7.62 to 5.56 to reduce the weight load on soldiers but now they keep discussing the lethality of 5.56 and the possibility to move up in caliber.
Sure, most these new ACRs & others have switchable loadouts for different calibers, but you'd want most your forces using the same caliber ammunition so coming to a decision before hand would be nice.
Max-
That wasn't the only reason they switched. The accuracy was also increased because of less recoil (when US went from M14 to M16). However, the lethality reduced too.
What we need is 7.62 with same recoil as 5.56
I'll take the 5.56 in Combat. I'll take the extra ammo over the more powerful ammo. Were good shots……
wouldn't it be nice for afgan troops who are running up and down hills had lighter ammo and the Irag troops riding in vehicles over flat desert be able to carry heavier ammo. (With accuracy being equal of course)
The problem with the 5.56 is that in close quarters and street battles the bullets go straight threw the jihadies. Most of whom get drugged up on a regular basis.
Personaly from what ive seen its a great rifle. Talked to a buddy of mine who had a friend who owned a civilian masada. He said it was great and was as durable as hell.
Price will come down as the amount ordered rises.
Also wtf isnt the military ordering a crapload of aa12's?
By far I love the HK416 and the ACR. Hopefully one of these guns will replace the horrible gun from the 1960's known as the M16 and the M16 on slimfast known as the M4… these guns jam WAY too much. Everyday there's another report about how the M16/M4 jammed on a solider. Even multiple videos on military.com of soldiers being in the middle of a firefight and the poor soldiers gun jams right up…. luckily in the vids they survived the fight… but you know their confidence for the next fight is definitely extremely low, wondering if his/her gun will work next time. Also why are we even using a gun from the 1960's still? That's over 50 years!!! HALF A CENTURY! Way pay time for a new gun! :(
Remind me how long the Ma Deuce has been in service?
And What's that I've been hearing about people wanting to bring back the M1911? Age should have nothing to do with judging a weapon. Rather it should be judged on it's ability to meet the troops needs. If you don't think the M-16 meets those requirements, O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay for you. But don't pull the age card.
Zach part of the problems you here arent about jams but the shere amount of rounds down the barrel. Sometimes i wonder if the army needs to become obessed about rifle skills for all soldiers like the marine corps do.
That statement came from a budy of mine who was in the army up until a yr or two ago. He said to many guys in a firefight would just go back to old habits and try spray and pray.
Also with the jams a simple part of the gas piston system can be replaced with a another part already on the market and its not a problem. Another guy i talked to said he new alot of guys who jus tgot lazy after a few weeks and didnt clean ther rifles right.
i notice you said the word "soldier". theres a reason soldiers' weapons malfunction or have a stoppage (jams are put on breads). they dont take proper care of their weaopn. they didnt clean it properly because they are lazy or they left the weapon laying around to get crushed by something heavy or they messed up the spring in the magazine or anything else that they somehow fucked up. the only reason an M16 or M4 would have a stoppage is because the user fucked it up. all stoppages are caused by the person firing the weapon. malfunctions are the weapon fucking up and if it has recieved proper care that wont happen. personally i think we need a better weapons system but saying that the AR series weapons are outdated is just plain being naive. they are excellent weapons but with how "technologically advanced" we are we should have much better weapons being used right now
Its crap to say that the M-4s jam to much, nor is their confidence "definitely extremely low". If it was they would be grabbing the nearest AK-47, and I haven't seen any videos of anyone doing that in the middle of a fire fight.
The reason that you are (The US and most of the Western world) is using a 50 year old gun is because nothing (apart from the 65 year old AK) can match its balance of weight, firepower, accuracy and hitting power and simplicity. I mean the guns you mention are still MODIFIED AR-15s. Just look at them carefully. The gas system they have is INFERIOR to the direct impulse system, it adds unnessecary weight and complexity.
Stoner and Armalite examined the use of a piston system when they developed the AR-10/AR-15. They decided it was not required, and 17 million weapons later, they are still right.
By the way how come the M-4s only jam WAY too much in the middle of firefights. How come they don't jam as other times?. Seems to me someone is blaming thieir weapon for not been able to jump out of thieir fox hole and attack the Taliban. In fact, this is a perfect mission for MYTHBUSTERS to sort out once and for all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BB0Pu-rvFjs
laughed long and hard… VERY disappointed about the price. Like the man says, i will probably get myself a Robinson arms XCR instead.
very interesting rifle, but about a thousand bucks over priced. Way too spendy. Wasn't switching everything to polymer supposed to be cheaper than casting and milling? Where's our dividend?
I'll also agree that the M-16 family is not perfect, but still a very good weapon system. It's detractors are almost to a man basing their opinions off of anecdotes and not hard facts. But I am still in favor of changing our service rifle if one of the new generation is found to be more reliable in a scientifically arranged shoot-off contest.
The US Army in the '90s launched the Advanced Combat Rifle competition. It said it would adopt any rifle that could beat the M-16 by 30% (subject to weight and relaibility restrictions), The M-16 was based as 100%. The nearest any weapon got was 105%, but 3.5 pounds heavier. the rest only got as close as 85% of rounds on the target taht the M-16 could get. I am sure that they would reopen the competition if Bushmaster could beat the score, but I couldn't imagine them throwing out all their existing weapons just because Bushmaster or H&K said that the M-16/M-4 was 'getting old'.
I think they call it a 'shoot-off', as opposed to 'shooting your mouth off', which it seems a lot of people like to do. Put up or shut up Bushmaster!
Agreed. The only areas I think any of the new contenders might be a significant improvement in is reliablity during extended fire periods, very dirty/dusty conditions, and other times when taking down the weapon and cleaning it thoroughly is not an option. And those times are pretty rare for most situations and uses. Switching out the basic rifle for the whole military based on that criteria may or may not be worth the pay off in reliablity. If it means less dead servicemen, it's worth it to me, though I'm not convinced that it would.
My experience with the system is limited to civilian ARs, but I have had zero problems with them. Reliability has been as high as the semi auto AKs I have shot. And that is several thousand rounds in both types.
Wow thats great :)
Sensex IPO
Id love one to own, looks radical, & IF multicaliber, even more so.
Law suit or not; if they improved on the patent, it really doesn't matter. They can do that. On a side note they should edit their video, I don't think there name is Bush-mater. lol I think it's supposed to be BushMaster?
At MCT we were issued M16A4s and we shot a lot of rounds off. I had NO feeding problems because I cleaned my weapon as I should. Other people who gaffed off when we were supposed to be cleaning had several feeding problems. Jamming is not always to blame on the weapon. The m4s mentioned earlier could have jammed because the soldiers didn't clean their weapons properly.
Why so expensive Bushmaster? Wasn't this promised to have a $1500 price point? Who pays $3000 for a BASIC rifle? After you add optics and magazines and all the other goodies, this is one WAY overpriced gun that is only marginally better than previous-gen AR-15's.
Meh not impressed. Ive carried M-16s/M-4s for 10 years. Ive used them in combat and fired thousands of rounds through them. The weapon is solid. You need to keep it clean but any troop in a combat zone should want to clean his/her weapon everyday anyway. So many of the people here talking trash about the M-16 family have never carried or used them in combat.
The weapon is so easy to handle instinctively. You can shoot accurately with someone elses zero. Ive walked on to qual ranges and shot 36-37 out of 40 exposures on army ranges with a weapon Ive never personally zeroed. The recoil is close to non existent. There really isnt much more that needs to be done. The weapon is still in service over the HK G-36 and others because it still works and still kicks butt. One of the biggest reasons the weapon jams is double feeds caused by poorly maintained mags. This is coming from an armorer.
Eugene Stoner got it right. Its not broke we really dont need to fix it.
burried a short list; including visor; close to an old Notre Dame Rival; shush
~ A well-aimed spear is worth three. ~
share this One liners saying Tad Williams
Having owned two f\a M-16′s and 3 AR-15′s in the past and a f\a M-4 currently. I can say that the only problems I’ve ever experienced were due to my own neglect. This platform is more than adequate for most shooters and most targets at most combat distances. I have never used this weapon in combat but I shoot an average of 23000 rounds per year and am intimately familiar with any M-16 based reliability issue that may arise and it’s solution. I am a US civilian, currently working in Iraq and have spoken to a number of US troops regarding this issue. The responses to the question of the M-4 do vary; I did find that the troops who do like the M-4 always seem to have the “cleanest” rifle. Now, by clean I mean that there is minimal dust or dirt on the exterior of the rifle, the front and rear sights are clean, ejection port dust cover is always closed and a dust cover is on the muzzle. By that observation I think that it’s fair to believe that what I couldn’t (and didn’t ask to) see was just as clean. These soldiers were also the ones that had the best attitude, manners and sense of purpose. The issue with this rifle lies with its care. If you don’t take care of it, it won’t take care of you.
Just a question from a non-shooting technician.
If cleanliness is the problem with the M-16/M4 (and all rifles for that matter), is there a throw away plastic cover for daily carrying?
Something strong enough to not tear when being moved around, but light enough to be ripped off and then allow for firing?
I just remember the situation with the truckers that got ambushed in Iraq all those years ago (Private Lynch took a wrong turn).
I have a hard time imagining an M-4 bouncing around in an antique truck staying clean. Being dragged around by a 18 year old truck driver.
Granted, if you are on patrol or escort duty you would probably not need this. At that point you are supposed to be a professional.
But I assume even professionals hit the dirt when shots ring out….
I just remember a video of a guy in Vietnam crossing a muck filled river and falling in with his M-16. I think it was a show about the militaries initial problems with the m-16. Specifically the "never needs to be cleaned" pitch given out before they switched powders.
I just remember thinking "thats not good, the guy should have that protected when walking through hell…."
And if there is something, has the Army tried using it?
Yes there is a plastic muzzle cover that they issue that you can shoot right through if needed. I used one frequently in Iraq, although it's no substitute for regular maintenance and sufficient lubrication.
To all you young fellows talking about Mr. Stoner and his AR-15, he next did the AR18 which he tried to get the U.S. Army to use as, in his words, "it is a much better weapon". It (the AR-18) had a piston much like the AK-47.
It is all about the powder. If you have a very clean burning powder the AR-16 / M-16 systm will work fine. The problem we had in Nam was the army went with the cheapest bidder and had a powder that burned "dirty" compared to the tested loads. The chrome chamber of the original AR was also dropped due to cost. Dirty buring powder also impacted that area.
I like a piston system. If it is simple and robust like the AK it is great, too many people try to make things too complex and or CHEAP. Remember the original British Snyder cartridge was changed to a FOIL casing and not altered until the disaster in Africa showed troops under pressure would bend the ammo. Why foil? IT WAS CHEAP. The lowest bidder can get you killed.
No MR Old Fogey. Mr Stoner did not design the AR-18. Heres what the encyclopedia said:
Armalite AR-18
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The AR-18 was designed at ArmaLite in California by Arthur Miller, George Sullivan, and Charles Dorchester in 1963 as an improved alternative to the AR-15 design, which had just been selected by the U.S. military as the M16. While the AR-18 was never adopted as the standard service rifle of any nation, it has influenced many later weapons such as the British SA80, the Singaporean SAR-80 and SR-88, and the Heckler and Koch G36. It gained some notoriety through its use by the Irish Republican Army (IRA), who allegedly christened it the "Widowmaker".[1][2]
I didn't see Stoners name mentioned anywhere, And the AR-18 was into as good, or anyone could have picked the idea up and run with it, but no country adopted it, much prefering the AR-15 instead. I wonder why, perhaps you might enlighten me? It also went onto say in another article that it was designed to be manufactured in third worl countries were they didn't have percision forgings. Yes, cheap can get you killed, which is why no one used it, and took on board the AR-15. Stoner new better.
im gonna start by saying that im not saying that the AR18 article in wikipdedia was wrong. now that ive said that, pete your a fucking moron. i can go into wikipedia and say that i, a 20 year old marine, invented the m16 50 years ago. wikipedia is the last place to look for truthful information.
Dave is right on. If you keep it clean it works as advertised everytime. I never used a dust cover on the barrel due to potential rust on the flash suppressor and barrel if moisture takes hold and is not attended to. Take care of your M16/M4 and its mags and you are fine. Also knowing how to lube it for each climate helps. You dont want to use too much CLP in the desert. Sand sticks to it like glue. If you use a light almost finger tip coat you are good to go. Or you can use a synthetic. But you typically need to buy that yourself.
The SA80/SAR80 is a poor weapon. All the Brits Ive worked with hate the thing. Too heavy, too complicated, jams, too much, too hard to keep clean. Is what they have said countless times. That is why the SAS/SBS prefer the M-4. I will say the weapon I wish the US would have kept was the mighty Stoner 63 which the SEALs worshiped in Vietnam.
Cheers
The SAS now use the HK417 and HK416 alongside the Diemaco C8 series as the standard choice (I know this because I have trained with them). You're absolutely right about the L85A2. It's a pig of a weapon, and good on the SAS for not using it.
I personally have only had one malfunction with an M-16A2 and that was in boot camp during an extremely wet and muddy infiltration course. The chamber was muddy, preventing the bolt carrier from seating, any weapon will jam in this condition. The M-16 design is one of the best in my opinion, I prefer a full 20 inch barrel, the longer spacing of the front and rear sights make a big difference at the range.
ps: always film just the rifle. the talking head is less goodlooking!
No matter what weapon is chosen to replace the M16/M4 I am willing to put real money up that it will get just as many complaints in the first few years and undergo numerous "fixes" as well. Then in about 6-10 years from now the majority of folks will love whatever it is and will whine if anyone thinks about replacing it. That's just normal procurement. :-)
Haha, great thoughts. Think about this- we're still bitching and whining about the M16/M4s and trying to upgrade/fix them and how long have they been around?
It's a continuous process, but like you say– you can't please everyone.
I thought someone would mention 6.8 spc by now. What happened to the Barrett M468: m16 under and Barrett 6.8 upper. Brilliant idea from a brillant company. Too expensive or still close to be the next us rifle?
Uh, Bushmaster does sell an M-4 style carbine with a gas/piston system, and in 6.8mm..its about $1600 US dollars, just check the catalouge.
The AR-18 was designed as a cheaper alternative rifle; it used stamped sheet-metal recievers instead of the aerospace spec forged aluminum recievers of the M-16. Many poor countries did not have the production equipment to make the M-16 reciever; this was the only reason the AR-18 came into being.
So there you have it: the AR-18 was designed for third world countries and is second-rate compared to the M-16.
Being Old Corps I trained with the Good Wood Stock Weapons, M1-Garrand
and M-14 both really fine shooting.
You could reach out and touch the hearts and minds of your enemy with well placed fire.
Any weapon depends on the marksmanship of the shooter.
My first experience with the M-16 i was issued out of the National guard armory and went to the qualifieng range at fort Campbell without any zero shots.I was able to qualifey high expert, and had never hel one before.
Hits are in the hands of the shooter.
Well say what you will but the M4 is a good weapon and one I enjoy using. The new ones I'm sure are also good but lets not rush into something.
So does anyone else find it ironic that all of the people who like the AR-15 series of weapons are the worst piece of crap ever to get fielded are suddenly coming out of the woodwork when for the past six months or so people have pretty much done nothing but BMW about the M-16 and suck serious kalashnikov kock?
I can imagine considerable benefit to buyers to have more than one caliber version available, and even some modest benefit to being able to change caliber of an existing weapon (because it reduces costs associated which a changed ammunition standard).
But, I have a hard time seeing why it would be useful to make a caliber change quick and easy. Presumably, those who use the gun do not plan on taking multiple barrels and multiple types of ammunition with them into the field. I wouldn't think that one would alternative between 5.56mm and 6.8mm on the fly in the field the way one might between say 5.56mm and a 20mm-30mm grenade lanucher.
Question for the ANZAC Aussie/Kiwi troopers – Tell me about you hates/likes of the AUG.
Each time we change rifles, there is a reason. Bolt action to auto, auto to magazine fed, magazine fed to magazine fed with a different caliber and improved ergonomics. Now with the SCAR/ACR and the like, there is no real improvement or real change. They moved the charging handle and went to a piston driven system. Not worth the $3000.00 price tag as they will only come with 1 barrel anyway. For 3 grand, I can get an AR platform, piston driven or not, with some pretty damn good optics.
I've been carrying a variant of some sort or another of the M16/M4/AR15 for the past 25 years. I've never had a malfunction that I didn't cause myself, either through neglect, or self induced. PM your weapon AND magazines, keep it relatively clean, and it'll serve you right.
It's not like you have to waste time polishing boots anymore, put that time spent to weapons maintenance.
Viet Nam, 1st bat recon, 173RD 'HERD'.., M-16E1.. no jams, no smoke stacks, no misfires, no problems at all. Plenty of Combat firing…WD 40 sprayed into the receiver occasionally and it was great. My personal is an M-1 .30 Cal carbine WW-II/ Korea vintage…(IMI-88. Israeli Made)…
Jamming can occur for many reasons. Most of the time it's the magazine or the follower. If the rifle's clean, 99% of time it's your mag or improper ammo.
If Remington offered the ACR at 90% proceeds are in production, shipping, etc. and 10% in profit to the U.S. they would make a killing off of it. I have seen other videos of the ACR and learned it requires little cleaning and will survive drops in water and mud! that would clog the M4 and make it backfire, causing casualties. My advice is ask the ACR manufacturer fior those prices, and everyone is happy. even the soldiers.
this rifle stinks big time for the price??? also the thing comes in a 1×9 twist????, no thanks bushmaster i can do allot better with my money even at your own web site in the custom gun shop, there is a rifle there for the same price that is so much more effective and accurate, short stroke piston systems stink to hard on the weapon and also less accurate, the piston trend latey is finding out slowy that the gas system is better if you have the right trained operator, wait somebody will figure something better like an electronic activated action???, sounds impossible or to futuristic??? that's what they said about the tank/subs/planes
Most of the problems I had w/my M4 was due to feed issues from the worn out mags we were issued. Otherwise, it was a good little wpn. I think no matter what wpn, if your mags suck, you are in trble.
I'm sorry Pete by how has the M16 got a further range than the SLR?
that's 7.62 vs 5.56mm…..me thinks someone is talking out of their backside!
I agree with Brett…M16 or AR-15 jamming? Clean it and spend $15 on a P-Mag. I kept getting feed jams with the regular mil-spec metal mags, popped in a "P-Mag". I didn't have any mis-feeds. I didn't like the idea of plastic magazines at first, but after using them on my own rifles….I swear by them now.
While I don't like to store a rifle that hasn't been cleaned, I haven't tried a "piston" M-4 yet. I like the idea of the gas piston system keeping the bolt carrier area clean, but I still have reservations about actually using one.
…..Spending $2500-$3000 on a "new" rifle that still fires the same M855 round? Waste of money….
M4- 16 is a fine weapon and as along as I have a cleaning rod in my pack and another zip tied to my weapon I am good to go.
does any one know where i can find some ACR Wallpapers?
besides the one that are on magpul or bushmaster… they are only 4 or 5…
The Bushmaster ACR is a pile of junk! on the other hand the Remington ACR is great!!!!